Assassinations in War

Remember when Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan? Many people asked the question about whether or not his killing, clearly ordered at the highest levels, was keeping in the laws of war. I am not a lawyer, and this post should not be taken as legal advice by the handful of people who will ever be in this situation, but the answer is that it was. Why do I believe that?

First off, this was not the first time that the US had specifically targeted an enemy leader in war. Fidel Castro aside, the US killed Isoroku Yamamoto during World War II by deliberately shooting down a plane transporting him. The British assassinated Reinhard Heydrich in cooperation with Czech partisans during World War II as well.

Why were these killings permissible? While neither Yamamoto nor Heydrich were active in hostilities at the moment they were killed, they were commanders who were actively engaged in the war effort. Clearly part of the uniformed military, both of them were planning attacks, and so was bin Laden.

And was there a war in which Osama bin Laden was a commander? Yes: right after 9/11 the Congress authorized the use of military force against those who planned the attacks. Osama bin Laden was always a military target: the real surprise isn't that he got killed, but that very few of the critics of the recent action realized this earlier.

False Charity

This is the time of year when people give to charity. As such people are probably thinking to whom to give. Should they give to the orphanage down the street, or to the anti-malaria campaign in Africa? Maybe they should give to an organization protecting the environment, or to the local alma mater.

But only one of those is actually doing a good dead. If you were good, you would put your money were it would do the most good. Any motivation other then that isn't actually good. So where should you put your money?

Until recently this was a very difficult question to answer. But thanks to there is an answer. GiveWell ranks charities according to the one metric that matters: will they be a good use of your donations? Not the donations in the past, but the one that is sitting in your pocket right now.

Give Well. Because if you haven't, you didn't actually give at all.

Social Security

And it's back on. I've been a bit busy, distracting from my duties in the war on error.

Today's error is a common one: Saying Social Security does not add to the deficit because its future claims are covered, or reversing this claim. I'm not going to weigh in on the second part: it's an accounting issue, and I'm not qualified to answer. But I can say that the Trustees of the Social Security Trust Fund disagree.

So if the US government has these obligations to retirees, why aren't they part of the deficit? Simply put, it's because the government doesn't have to pay these obligations. Social Security benefits are defined by Congress and can be cut at any time. Furthermore, the obligations are on a fund which holds Treasuries and not on the Treasury itself. The debt only describes the amount the Treasury owes, and not the obligations that other government entities have.

Social Security doesn't add to the deficit because it's in good financial shape. It doesn't add to the deficit any more then you owe your Aunt a present because you said you would get her one. It also doesn't add to the deficit because it's separate from the obligations the government owes, the same way your debt isn't your brother's debt, even if you think he might bail you out.

AIDS Denialism

AIDS denialism is one of the few forms of error with a quantifiable death toll. In South Africa AIDS denialism along with conservative views on spreading information about sexual health contributed to the deaths of millions as an epidemic spread unchecked.

Now does HIV cause AIDS? I would be very surprised if it did not.

The Durban Declaration, available for free from Nature summarizes the evidence for the HIV AIDS hypothesis in very detailed, still nontechnical language. It will take about 5 minutes to read thoroughly. There is much about the epidemic that the HIV causation hypothesis explains, from the Lazarus effect of ARV to the rapid spread across the world of the epidemic.

Denialism costs lives: not believing HIV causes AIDS can cause people to be nonchalant about condom usage or ARVs. This is inevitably a deadly course of action. Unlike climate change there doesn't seem to be a lot of money in the opposing position. So why do people deny that HIV causes AIDS?

What is the War on Error?

The War on Error derives its title from the last words of Gerard Depardieu's Cyrano de Bergerac. As Cyrano is dying from a head injury he raises his sword one last time against his eternal enemies of ignorance and superstition.

The War on Error is here to combat the false ideas that many of us accept. It aims to do battle with all whom would bind men to their will by obscuring the truth. The truth has few friends and many enemies. Let us therefore rally to its aid.

The rules of civility are content-neutral and will be enforced with an iron hand.